header-logo header-logo

07 October 2016
Issue: 7717 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Libel & slander

Lokhova v Longmuir [2016] EWHC 1977 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 201 (Jul)

 

The Queen’s Bench Division allowed the defendant’s appeal against the master’s decision, rescinding her direction releasing to a judge the claimant’s application to amend her particulars of claim in libel proceedings. The application should more properly be heard by a puisne judge, as the legal issues raised upon the application were of importance, were not straightforward and the master’s decision had not fully grappled with the likely complexities.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sharpe Pritchard—Victoria Heald-Barraclough

Sharpe Pritchard—Victoria Heald-Barraclough

Magic Circle hire strengthens Sharpe Pritchard’s infrastructure finance capability

Lewis Silkin—Iskander Fernandez

Lewis Silkin—Iskander Fernandez

Lewis Silkin adds corporate crime specialist to growing dispute resolution team

Morr & Co—Michael Charalambous

Morr & Co—Michael Charalambous

Morr Co strengthens private client team with partner appointment

NEWS
Should every solicitor found to have acted dishonestly face automatic striking off? The answer, argues John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke LLP in NLJ this week, is no 
Winning an arbitral award against a state is one thing; enforcing it is another
Can government success in court tell us whether the rule of law is healthy? 
Poorly drafted dispute resolution clauses can trigger litigation before the real dispute is even addressed
As cryptocurrency becomes mainstream, family lawyers are increasingly confronting the challenges it creates on divorce
back-to-top-scroll